1. An intervention study

2.  Introductions ◦ Teachers ◦ Researchers  Outline of the project ◦ Questions ◦ Understandings/expectations

3.  9.45 – Research background: ◦ Rosenthal ◦ Teacher behaviours ◦ Student characteristics: Gender, social class, ethnicity  10.30 – Morning tea  11.00 – Characteristics: ◦ Student characteristics: ethnicity ◦ Teacher characteristics: Babad, Weinstein, Rubie-Davies  12.15 – Lunch  1.15 – Whole class expectations: ◦ The evidence ◦ View/analyse own videos ◦ Areas for development: grouping and learning experiences, motivation and evaluation, class climate and student responsibility for learning ◦ Identification of areas for growth

4.  Rosenthal and Jacobson ◦ Rosenthal and rats ◦ Experimenter effects ◦ Expectations in classrooms ◦ Pygmalion in the classroom ◦ Conclusions ◦ Controversy

6. Formation of Class Expectations Student Outcomes: Social/Academic Instructional Practices Opportunities to Learn Teacher Beliefs Socioemotional Environment Instructional Environment

7.  Formation of expectations  Personality correlates of teachers  Transmission of differential expectations  Student perceptions  Educational and social outcomes

8. Greater influencesLesser influences  Portfolio information  Gender  Ethnicity  Social class  Diagnostic labels  Attractiveness  Siblings  Names  Language style  Personality and social skills  Teacher/ student background

9. 1. Wait time less for lows 2. Give lows the answer/ ask someone else 3. Inappropriate reinforcement 4. Criticising lows for failure 5. Praise lows less for success 6. Fail to provide feedback to public response of lows 7. Pay less attention to/ interact less with lows 8. Call on lows less frequently 9. Seat lows farther from the teacher 10. Demand less from lows 11. Teachers interact more in private with lows; monitor and structure activities closely 12. Differential grading of tests 13. Less friendly interaction with lows 14. Less informative feedback to lows 15. Lows receive less eye contact and nonverbal communication 16. Less intrusive instruction of highs 17. Less use of effective instructional methods with lows

10. Brophy (1985) behaviours towards low expectancy students Good and Weinstein (1986) teachers provided less capable students with:  not helping enough to improve students’ answers  praising incorrect answers or inappropriate behaviours  demanding less of them  shorter and less informative feedback  less intrusive instruction  less use of time- consuming instructional methods  less opportunity to perform publicly  less opportunity to think and analyse  less choice on assignments/ tasks  less autonomy and more frequent monitoring  more gratuitous and less contingent feedback

11.  Development of research into teacher differential behaviour  Positives and negatives related to teacher differential behaviour

12.  Climate  Feedback  Input  Output

13.  Stronger effects for affective climate and instructional input  A smaller effect for output  A practically negligible effect for differential feedback behaviours

14. 1. What are the specific types of differential behaviours? 2. What is the ideological legitimacy and educational desirability of each type of differential behaviour? 3. Which group of students receives an advantage from each type of teacher differential behaviour? 4. What is the teachers’ natural tendency and how would they wish to deal with particular students and different groups of students? 5. To what extent are teachers able to control their specific verbal and non-verbal behaviours?

15.  The components of the theory clash  Affective displays and actual feelings  Controlling affective displays: verbal and non-verbal

16.  Do students perceive teacher differential behaviour?  Interpreting behaviours differently  Perceptions of teacher interactions

17.  Is there agreement in relation to degrees of learning support?  Is there agreement in relation to degrees of emotional support?

18.  Effects on students  Classroom climate and morale  Fairness and equity  Social comparison process is powerful and prevalent in schools

19.  Adams (1965) ◦ Balance between what we put in and what we get out ◦ Influenced by others  Sense of justice

21.  Student characteristics ◦ Ethnicity  Teacher characteristics ◦ High bias and low bias teachers: Babad ◦ High differentiating and low differentiating teachers: Weinstein ◦ High expectation and low expectation teachers: Rubie-Davies

22.  Gender  Ethnicity  Social class  Diagnostic labels  Physical attractiveness  Language style  Personality and social skills  Teacher/student background  Names  Other siblings

23.  Primary school girls  Secondary school boys – maths, science  Ability/effort  Teacher interactions  PE  Reading and language  Social behaviour

24.  Middle class students are expected to perform at higher levels than lower social class  Low social class are vulnerable to teacher expectations  Some evidence teachers’ assessments for lower class are accurate but over-rate middle class  But what about NZ?

25. Rubie-Davies  Expectations vary according to whether or not a child has a label, e.g. ADHD  Stinnett (2001): 144 preservice teachers ◦ ADHD, no label; Ritalin, in Special Ed ◦ Description of child; vignette

26. Rubie-Davies  Physical attractiveness  Language style  Personality and social skills  Teacher/student background  Names  Siblings

27. Rubie-Davies  African American/ White students  Hispanic/ White students  Vulnerability  UK  But what about NZ? ◦ St George (1983) academic ◦ Stoddart (1998) social skills ◦ Rubie-Davies, Hattie, Hamilton (2006)

28. Rubie-Davies  Rubie-Davies (2006) British Journal of Educational Psychology  21 teachers ◦ 540 students  261 NZ European  88 Maori  91 PI  94 Asian

29. Rubie-Davies  Expectation survey ◦ 1-7 Likert scale  Teacher judgement of student achievement  Running records

30. Rubie-Davies

33.  Teacher expectations ◦ Ethnicity or social class?  Societal stereotypes  Lowered expectations ◦ Effect on pedagogy  Lesson pace  Structured environment  Ability  Self-fulfilling prophecy effect/ sustaining expectation effect

34.  Prejudice (bias) is a negative attitude  A stereotype is a generalisation, a belief  http://www.understandingprejudice.org/iat/ http://www.understandingprejudice.org/iat/

35.  A belief about the personal attributes of a group of people  Stereotypes are sometimes over-generalised, inaccurate and resistant to new information  Stereotypes are shortcuts  Stereotypes are biased  Problems with the use of stereotypes  Prejudice: A set of negative stereotypes loaded with aggression and strong emotions carrying the idea that ‘we’ are better than ‘them’

36.  Often based on commonly held stereotypes  What is teacher bias?  Objectivity appears to be difficult  Experimental vs naturalistic studies?  Reversed bias  Reducing bias

37.  Babad (1998) Draw-a-Person Intelligence test ◦ One-sixth of teachers objective ◦ One half mildly biased ◦ One-quarter highly biased ◦ A small proportion reverse biased

38.  In theory  In practice  Personality questionnaire  Classroom behaviour

39.  Elisha Babad  Rhona Weinstein  Christine Rubie-Davies

40.  Preferential affect is at the heart of the teacher expectation issue  Identified high and low bias teachers

41.  Video clips  Ten-second exposure  Babad’s studies in elementary and secondary schools and at university

42.  Babad et al, 1989; 1991; Babad & Taylor, 1992 ◦ Adult judges of teacher non-verbal behaviour ◦ What young students perceived in teachers’ non- verbal behaviour ◦ Students from different grade levels ◦ In Israel and New Zealand ◦ Students made guesses about the student the teacher was talking to or about ◦ Results

43.  Students live different lives in one classroom  Student perceptions of differential treatment in the classroom

45. High achieversLow achievers  Favoured in teacher interactions  Higher expectations  More opportunity and more choice  Receive more frequent negative feedback  More teacher-directed treatment

46.  Teacher is the defining agent of ability not themselves, peers or parents  Public incidents  Importance of nonverbal cues  Children relate smartness to conforming behaviour and fast completion of work  Effects on children’s feelings

47.  Ways in which students are grouped for instruction  Materials and activities through which the curriculum is taught  Evaluation system that teachers use to assess learning  Motivational system used to engage students  Responsibility that students have in directing and evaluating learning  Climate of relationships within the class, with parents and with the school

48.  Ability grouping  Highly differentiated curriculum  Intelligence is fixed  Learning for external reward  Teacher as director  Teacher as academic instructor  Variety of grouping  Challenging learning experiences  Intelligence is malleable  Learning for personal growth  Teacher as facilitator  Teacher as socialiser

49.  The question is not, what is it about students that mean teachers have high or low expectations for them; the question we should be asking is, what is it about teachers that means some have high or low expectations for all their students?

50.  What do we portray in our verbal and non- verbal behaviour?  Lie to Me video clip

51.  What kinds of messages are you delivering to students? Verbally/ non-verbally?  Is there any evidence of bias?  What is it like for students to be in your class?  What does your body language tell students?

56.  Luke: “A lot of repetition, every day…until they can start recalling their basic number facts.”  Hannah: “They need activities that are challenging so they are motivated. If I don’t make them independent as well [as the high ability students] they won’t learn to run by themselves. They’ll always need the teacher.”

57.  Teaching statements: orienting students to the lesson, introducing and explaining new concepts, using student prior knowledge  Feedback to students  Open and closed questions  Positive and negative behaviour management  Procedural statements

58.  High expectation teachers: a facilitative approach  Low expectation teachers: a directive approach

59.  Mixed ability groupings  Worked with a variety of peers  Well-defined learning goals  Responsibility for learning  Choices in learning experiences  Intrinsically motivated  Frequent feedback  Answering open questions that challenged thinking  Extended explanations of new concepts  Positive social climate

60.  Teacher defined activities  Extrinsically motivated  Worked in ability groups  Little mixed ability interaction  Less ownership of learning  Unsure of learning direction  Answering closed questions  Limited explanations of concepts  Plenty of procedural directions  Negative social climate

61.  Grouping  Learning activities  Classroom climate  Student responsibility  Motivation  Evaluation

62.  Teacher journals ◦ Comments on the day – how are you feeling?  Did you learn anything?  Did anything surprise you?  Did you enjoy the day?  What will you take back to your class?  Anything you are thinking about changing? ◦ Possible areas for development?